Annex B: Example of an EU proposal breaching subsidiarity

In 2012, the European Parliament and Council issued a Draft
Regulation on Establishing a Fund for European Aid to the Most
Deprived. This aimed to establish an
EU-level fund to support
member states in the provision of food banks and goods for the
homeless. The proposal thereby related to cohesion, a shared
competence between the
EU and member states -
meaning that the subsidiarity test was applied. The European
Commission argued that action to combat poverty at the
EU level was necessary,
given the level of poverty and social exclusion across the Union.
It recognised that the
EU economic and fiscal
crisis had exacerbated levels of poverty across Member States, and
saw the fund as a way of 'demonstrating the direct solidarity of
the Union with poor people'. It argued that the principle of
subsidiarity was respected, as the
EU would leave it up to
Member States to decide how the funds were administered.

However, the
UK Parliament argued that
it was not necessary to address the issue of poverty at an
EU level. Given the
different challenges and financial constraints across Member
States, it was far more appropriate to take action at a national
level. Further, it was unacceptable to bind all Member States into
contributing to this fund, when national support in most instances
was adequate. The
UK Parliament also
dismissed the Commission's argument that the fund would show
solidarity with the most deprived people across Europe, stating:
'the fact that the Commission is anxious to be seen to act (to
mitigate its contribution to the economic and financial crisis)
does not mean that
EU action is necessary or
justified'.

Both the House of Commons and the Lords wrote a reasoned opinion
to the European Commission and Council (as they were proposing the
action), setting out why they thought that the proposal did not
accord with the principle of subsidiarity. They were supported by
the Riksdag of the Kingdom of Sweden and by the German Bundestag.
However, as less than a third of
EU national parliaments
took issue with the proposals, the Council and Commission were not
forced to review them.